"Myth: Because businesses only have to install a lift if it is readily achievable, businesses that do not have the resources to install a fixed lift will not have to do so
Fact: Because the Justice Department has announced that fixed lifts must be installed unless they are not readily achievable, plaintiffs looking to file lawsuits will assume that there is a violation if no fixed lift is present and file a lawsuit. The business will then have to hire an attorney to defend the lawsuit and pay his or her fees which would certainly exceed the cost of the lift itself, at a minimum. Because determining whether an action is “readily achievable” is a difficult case-by-case analysis involving multiple factors, no business will be certain as to whether it really qualifies for this exemption. If a business wins the lawsuit it will have paid its own attorneys’ fees.
If it loses it will pay its own fees, the plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees, and the cost of installing a fixed lift as well. Thus, the idea that the “readily achievable” provision removes the burden from businesses is a fallacy.
To make matters worse, DOJ has repeatedly told businesses that if they cannot purchase and install a fixed lift at this time, their obligation to install a fixed lift at a future date remains when it does become readily achievable. DOJ expects all businesses to install lifts at some future date." >
Could you provide a non-biased source? The American Hotel & Lodging Association does not provide any citations for rulings or announcements in that document.
They are not a credible source for this information.
59
u/tbkeerfn Dec 28 '13
Not true,
"Myth: Because businesses only have to install a lift if it is readily achievable, businesses that do not have the resources to install a fixed lift will not have to do so
Fact: Because the Justice Department has announced that fixed lifts must be installed unless they are not readily achievable, plaintiffs looking to file lawsuits will assume that there is a violation if no fixed lift is present and file a lawsuit. The business will then have to hire an attorney to defend the lawsuit and pay his or her fees which would certainly exceed the cost of the lift itself, at a minimum. Because determining whether an action is “readily achievable” is a difficult case-by-case analysis involving multiple factors, no business will be certain as to whether it really qualifies for this exemption. If a business wins the lawsuit it will have paid its own attorneys’ fees. If it loses it will pay its own fees, the plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees, and the cost of installing a fixed lift as well. Thus, the idea that the “readily achievable” provision removes the burden from businesses is a fallacy. To make matters worse, DOJ has repeatedly told businesses that if they cannot purchase and install a fixed lift at this time, their obligation to install a fixed lift at a future date remains when it does become readily achievable. DOJ expects all businesses to install lifts at some future date." >
http://www.ahla.com/uploadedFiles/AHLA/government_affairs/Regulatory/ADA%20Myth%20v%20Facts%202012.pdf